Dr. Nagy I. Zoltán szerk.: Fragmenta Mineralogica Et Palaentologica 9. 1979. (Budapest, 1979)
Tarkő animals again differ extensively (and significantly on the ground of present material), the mean of the latter being significantly different from recent European material too. The recent European and Iraqi (except the single Rh. f. irani from E.Iraq) specimens practically have the same means and do not differ from Osztramos Loc. 8 animals. Along with the length of P 2 , this is the only measurement (among the recent populations studied) where all the Carpathian and Dalmatian populations observed are equal. The very similar width of P 2 in the single Rh. f. irani, Rh. f. mikadoi , Rh. f. nippon and specimen from "Asia Minor" might well due to random, but her, the otherwise big-bodied Rh. f. proximus has the lowest value. 2 The mprphology of P (as one can infer from size diagrams) and its position in the toothrow are among the most important characters observed in this work. The Rh., delphinen sis had a rather well developed P 2 practically in the line of toothrow. The whole later history of the fer rum equinum group shows the relative shortening of toothrow because of more and more approach of C and P 4 , then diminishing and extrusion of P 2 . This tooth more or less in the toothrow in Pliocene forms. Its crown is 4-5 times bulkier in Podlesice animals than in the present recent forms, and partly in the toothrow. In the animal of Osztramos Loc. If the tooth already become decidedly smaller but still half in row. C andP 4 nearer each other. There are probably two forms in Osztramos Loc. 9. The smaller has more primitive, bulky, long and wide, orocaudally less pressed P 2 . In the great animal, the tooth is more pressed orocaudally and at the same time it is less in row. The few specimens are similar in Csarnóta. On the locality of Osztramos 7 the limited number of material shows two types. The smaller is more ancient, while the bigger seems to be more progressed. The P 2 more or less in the toothrow. In the small animal of Osztramos Loc. lc the P 2 is orocaudally more or less pressed and fully in row. In the species Rh. macrorhinus from Beremend the P 2 is comparatively small and pressed out from the line of toothrow. In Osztramos Loc. 3 the uniformly small P 2 is more or less out of row, C and P 4 almost in contact or divided by a narrow diastema. The animal of the Osztramos Loc. 8 is one of the most interesting forms. Its P 2 is extensively variable, In many specimens it is in the toothrow, in others it is fully out of line. C- P 4 are in contact in some specimens while in others there is a more or less developed diastema. The decidedly small P 2 of the Uppony animal is fully out of line of row and those of Tarkő population are without exception also extruded. Among the recent specimens there are individuals with slight diastema between C and P 4 and so, P 2 not fully expelled. 1 q Length of upper M x-M (see, figure 8: B and table 4). The differences are less expressed here than in the more oral portions of toothrow. Because of the very fragmentary state of Pliocene specimens, I could only compare out Rh. macrorhinus from Beremend and the Osztramos Loc If specimens with a good series of individuals from Podlesice. The former being well the same in this respect, while the latter is also not different significantly. The very good material from Osztramos Loc, 8 is significantly different (shorter) from all Pliocene forms. In the other hand it has significantly shorter M---M^ row, shorter than Tarkő, Dalmatian, and Carpathian Basin South populations. The differences in means of recent populations are important and clearly show differences in size. The Kashmir Rh.f, proximus is absolutely greater than any Pleistocene and recent animal and just equals with the Pliocene specimens. M 1 length (figure 6: A and table 1). In itself, this measurement does not belong to the so called "good ones". The Pliocene populations are rather uniform in this respect. Rh. csakvarensis has shorter M*- than any other, except some specimens from Csarnóta and Osztramos Loc. 7. Rh. delphinensis from La Grive Saint Alban approaches all the others being somewhat greater than Rh. csakvarensis. Podlesice, Osztramos Loc. 9 and Csarnóta specimens do not differ significantly. The only significantly different population is (with short M*) the one from Osztramos Loc. 7. The species Rh. macrorhinus well agrees with all other Pliocene specimens except the small series from Osztramos Loc. 7. The population of Osztramos Loc. 8 actually does not differ from Csarnóta animals, however significantly does from the ones from Osztramos Loc. 7. There is also a significant difference between Osztramos 8 and Osztramos Loc. 3 specimens. Besides the mean value of Osztramos Loc. 8 is significantly smaller than that of Uppony animals and does not differ from the other Pleistocene populations as well as from recent Carpathian and Dalmatian animals. q M length (see, figures 4: 1,2; 6: B and table 2). In this measurement - not according to the expectations - there were no important deviations between the populations studied.
